Entries in streaming
(22)

In an article recently published by Paul Resnikoff, he wraps up the facts that detail all the problems that are killing the music business, the industry the artists, and eventually music as the form of art that we all love.

This is so depressing to read, yet so true, that the earlier we deal with, the better. Paul’s article had me inspired to take action and write this in response. We have to do our best to save music!

Getting a record deal has never been easy. Even back in the days when the A&R man was your friend and an artist could make a substantial living from physical sales alone - you still had to be discovered, and nurtured, by someone with clout, connections, resources and know-how. But perhaps a musician was judged more on talent back then, rather than a hook or gimmick.

So reports are claiming more and more users are embracing the subscription streaming service. As a matter of fact, Spotify just passed the 40M milestone. Should we actually celebrate? Is this good news for musicians, creators and all copyright holders? Or is this just a revenue growth for Daniel Ek and his fellow startups moguls?

So here’s the deal: streaming services are gaining more audience everyday, scoring more subscribers.

With the rise of the streaming convenience, chances are not a lot of people are buying your CDs at your live shows.

They’d rather know if they can find you on Spotify so they can look you up on their phone.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s not because they don’t want to buy your merchandise. They might even be asking you that question at the same time they’re buying a t-shirt you’re selling for five times the price of your EP.

Nielsen recently published its annual Music 360 Report, detailing consumer spending in music, especially subscription services. According to Nielsen, the appetite for music in the United States is high. Apparently, 91% of the US population is listening up to 24 hours of music a week, a much larger number than reported for similar surveys in the 1990s.

Apple’s statement that they would not be paying artists and the consequent backlash from performers like Taylor Swift has been generating a great deal of commentary regarding revenue from music streaming services in general. This article examines some of the issues relating to streaming, piracy, and the difficulties associated with profiting from recorded music in the digital age.

More subscribers, more problems. As Spotify continues to grow, in both users and catalog, so do its detractors. Thom Yorke and producer Nigel Godrich recently took a stand against the streaming music service, citing that it’s “horrible for new artists.”

We’ve seen this before. The Black Keys recently refused to put their newest album “El Camino” on Spotify citing its detraction from album sales.

There’s a common thread here. Only established bands who have already made their money are the ones taking the stand against streaming music. New and upcoming bands are more willing to cast a big net to get ears to their music. It’s been proven time and time again that artists make more money off touring than album sales, so why not do everything you can to maximize your exposure to potential new ticket buyers?

It has become commonplace to hear artists, management, agents and labels complain about how streaming will crush the music industry. This same mentality arose during the transition into the CD and digital downloading eras. Don’t fear the numerous myths that have saturated our industry, streaming is not evil; merely different. And it is about to become the next powerhouse, quite possibly changing music distribution in a way never seen before. This transformation has already commenced in television and film. The music industry has fallen behind, but is quickly catching up with vengeance.

The US Supreme Court is hearing an appeal that could change your ownership rights to music.

If you purchase music as physical media or license-free downloads, you are protected by the so-called First Sale Doctrine of the US Copyright Act, which gives people the right to lend, resell, or give away the works that they’ve bought, even if those works contain copyrighted elements.

But the case of Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, currently being heard by the US Supreme Court, could undermine First Sale Doctrine, making ownership feel more like licensing. How could you be affected?

So you’re an independent recording artist, casting about everywhere you can for airplay and exposure. Pandora, the internet-radio service with the taste-smart music library, has just accepted one of your original recordings for rotation. Great, right? Pandora provides access to your music on one of the most talked-about music platforms out there. It’s a step in the right direction, a win.

Pundits say music ownership is passe. But if an army of music owners demanding high-fidelity and personal choice suddenly converted to streaming audio as their only music source, could the Cloud deliver? Let’s run the numbers.

So, most of you are probably aware of the recent changes that Spotify has made in regards to opening up its platform for developers to build apps upon. In March, the social music service will be opening up an app store to help app developers get paid for their hard work. Last week, I read a really interesting article on the Gaurdian titled Spotify: ‘We have to turn ourselves into the OS of music’.

As a heavy user of the free version of Spotify , I really love what they are doing for social music but there are few major problems that I feel will prevent it from becoming the OS of music.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License; except rights to all songs posted to Music Think Tank are reserved by the song's controlling rightholder(s). Powered by Squarespace | Designed by Sculpt | Managed by Hypebot